The court said the student failed to establish that wearing a headscarf was an essential religious practice and held that a uniform, non-discriminatory dress code can be enforced by the school.

The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a petition by a minor student seeking permission to wear a hijab or headscarf along with the prescribed school uniform, holding that the petitioner did not provide sufficient factual or legal material to establish that wearing a headscarf was an essential religious practice protected under Article 25 of the Constitution. 

A division bench of Justices J J Munir and Indrajeet Shukla delivered the judgment in a case concerning a student of Tagore Public School in Attarsuiya, Prayagraj. The student, who had completed Class X, had sought admission to Class XI in the same institution while continuing to wear a headscarf with the prescribed uniform. 

The student, through her mother, told the court that she had been wearing the headscarf while studying at the school from Classes VI to X. She argued that preventing her from continuing to wear it infringed her constitutional rights, including freedom of expression and religious freedom. The school administration, Uttar Pradesh government and CBSE opposed the plea. 

The bench, however, found that the petition did not establish the religious necessity claimed by the student. The court also referred to photographs from different classes and noted that no other girl in the school, including students from the same religious community, was wearing a headscarf. It observed that a mere assertion that a practice is essential to a religion is not sufficient to invoke the protection of Article 25. 

School Uniform Policy Upheld

The court held that a school can enforce a prescribed dress code when the policy is uniform, bona fide and non-discriminatory and is intended to maintain discipline and the institution's identity. The judgment also recognised the role of a common uniform in promoting equality and a religion-neutral atmosphere in educational institutions. 

The bench further held that the fact that the school had previously permitted the student to wear a headscarf did not create a permanent right to continue doing so. The dispute therefore turned not only on the student's individual preference but also on whether the claimed religious practice had the constitutional protection necessary to override the institution's uniform policy. 

Court Refers to Earlier Rulings

While deciding the petition, the Allahabad High Court considered earlier judgments involving religious attire and educational institutions. It referred in particular to the Karnataka High Court's 2022 full-bench judgment on the hijab issue, describing it as persuasive authority and finding no reason to take a different view on the question of whether wearing a hijab had been established as an essential religious practice. 

The bench also noted that the Karnataka judgment was later considered by the Supreme Court in Aishat Shifa v State of Karnataka, where a two-judge bench delivered a split verdict. As a result, the Allahabad High Court noted that there is no final authoritative Supreme Court ruling settling the issue of whether wearing a hijab constitutes an essential religious practice. 

The ruling comes in the context of continuing legal debate over the balance between individual religious expression and institutional dress codes. In this case, the High Court ultimately upheld the school's authority to enforce its uniform policy and dismissed the student's plea.

 The Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust is set to take crucial decisions on Monday as it convenes its first meeting since allegations of theft of devotees' offerings at the Ayodhya Ram Temple surfaced. The meeting, chaired by Trust President Mahant Nritya Gopal Das, is expected to deliberate on the resignations of General Secretary Champat Rai and Trustee Dr. Anil Mishra, while reviewing developments in the ongoing investigation into the alleged donation theft.

Originally scheduled to be held at Maniram Das Chhawani, the meeting has been shifted to the Ram Mandir complex and will begin at 3 pm.

According to Trust sources, the resignations submitted by Champat Rai on June 26 and Dr. Anil Mishra are likely to be accepted through a majority decision of the trustees. Since its formation on February 5, 2020, every Trust meeting had previously been led by Champat Rai in his capacity as General Secretary.

Under the Trust's constitution, the resignation of a trustee or office-bearer does not become effective immediately upon submission. It requires formal consideration and acceptance by the Trust during a meeting. Similarly, the removal of a trustee requires a two-thirds majority after issuing a show-cause notice and providing an opportunity for the concerned individual to present their case.

The Trust meeting comes amid heightened scrutiny following allegations that employees responsible for counting devotees' offerings siphoned off cash and valuables. Investigators have reportedly recovered deleted CCTV footage with the assistance of forensic and IT experts. While the visuals allegedly show individuals concealing currency notes in their socks and pockets, police are continuing efforts to enhance the footage to establish clear identities.

Trust President Mahant Nritya Gopal Das broke his silence over the controversy, describing the alleged theft as deeply painful.

In a written statement, he said he was "deeply hurt" by the incident and demanded the strictest possible punishment for those responsible. He also expressed confidence that Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath would ensure that all those involved face appropriate legal action. Appealing for restraint, he urged people not to politicise an issue that concerns the faith of millions of devotees.

Meanwhile, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition seeking a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) inquiry into the alleged theft. The court observed that a similar matter is already pending before the Supreme Court, making further intervention unnecessary at this stage.

The petition had been filed by Lucknow-based advocate Mohit Ashok on June 12, requesting an independent central investigation into the allegations.

The controversy has also intensified political exchanges in Uttar Pradesh. Congress leader Imran Masood termed the alleged theft a serious breach of public faith, claiming that the scale of donations received by the temple warranted a thorough investigation.

On the other hand, BJP spokesperson R.P. Singh said the Trust meeting would not only review the progress of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe but also discuss the appointment of a new Chief Executive Officer and examine the Trust's financial statements for the previous financial year.

Samajwadi Party leaders continued to target the Trust's functioning, while BJP leaders accused the opposition of attempting to politicise the issue and tarnish the image of the Ram Temple.

The police investigation has also uncovered financial transactions allegedly linked to one of the arrested accused, Avinash Shukla, who was involved in counting donations. Investigators claim that despite drawing a monthly salary of around ₹15,000, he allegedly purchased a house, bought a vehicle, transferred money to his girlfriend, and gifted her an iPhone. Authorities are now examining the bank accounts of the accused as well as those of their family members to trace suspected proceeds.

Security has been tightened around the temple complex ahead of the Trust meeting, with barricades installed and vehicle movement restricted near the venue. The outcome of Monday's deliberations is expected to shape the Trust's administrative future while also influencing public confidence in the management of one of India's most prominent religious institutions.

The Allahabad High Court has officially started the recruitment process for 543 vacancies under the RO ARO Recruitment 2026, offering opportunities for Review Officer (RO), Assistant Review Officer (ARO), and Computer Assistant (CA) posts. The online application process began on June 1 and will continue till June 21, attracting thousands of government job aspirants across Uttar Pradesh and other states.

The recruitment drive, announced under Advertisement No. 02/2026, is being seen as one of the major judicial sector hiring exercises of the year. Authorities have also confirmed that the last date for fee submission is June 22, while correction windows will be available later for applicants to rectify errors in their forms.

Major judicial recruitment drive

The Allahabad High Court RO ARO Recruitment 2026 aims to strengthen administrative and technical manpower within the court system. Officials have stated that the vacancies are spread across multiple departments to improve operational efficiency in judicial administration.

The recruitment is expected to generate strong competition due to the prestige and stability associated with court jobs. Aspirants from Uttar Pradesh and neighbouring states are closely tracking the notification, given the limited number of high-level government administrative posts.

Important dates and schedule

Candidates applying for the recruitment must complete registration by June 21, while fee payment can be made until June 22. The correction window for application forms will remain open on June 24 and June 25, allowing candidates to fix errors in submitted details.

The examination date has not yet been announced. However, officials have indicated that admit cards will be released ahead of the exam schedule once finalized.

Eligibility and age criteria

The recruitment notification outlines specific eligibility conditions based on post categories. For Computer Assistant posts, the minimum age requirement is 18 years, while for RO and ARO positions, candidates must be at least 21 years old.

The upper age limit has been set at 35 years as of July 1, 2026. Age relaxation will be applicable as per government norms for reserved categories including SC, ST, OBC, and EWS candidates.

Application fee details

The application fee has been fixed at ₹1,200 for General and OBC candidates. Applicants belonging to EWS, SC, and ST categories will need to pay ₹1,000.

Candidates can make payments through multiple online modes including debit card, credit card, net banking, IMPS, and digital wallets, ensuring a fully digital application process.

Selection process and preparation

While the detailed examination pattern is yet to be released, candidates have been advised to begin preparation based on previous RO and ARO syllabi. Recruitment experts suggest that aspirants carefully verify eligibility criteria, documents, and application details to avoid rejection at later stages.

The selection process is expected to include written examination and subsequent stages as per official guidelines. With 543 posts available, the recruitment is likely to remain highly competitive.

Growing competition among aspirants

The announcement has already gained attention among government job seekers and competitive exam candidates. Judicial administrative roles are considered stable career options with strong growth prospects, making this recruitment highly sought after.

As the application deadline approaches, the focus now shifts to timely registration and preparation for the upcoming examination cycle.

Allahabad HC Orders FIR Against Rahul Gandhi in Citizenship Case

Allahabad HC orders FIR against Rahul Gandhi as the Lucknow bench directs CBI investigation into British citizenship allegations, marking a major development in the long-running dual citizenship row.

High Court Directs FIR  

The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court on Friday ordered the registration of an FIR against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. The court accepted the Uttar Pradesh government’s plea and directed that the Central Bureau of Investigation take up the case.

CBI Investigation Directed  

Counsel for the state government argued strongly that the matter required a CBI probe. The judge agreed and ordered the agency to investigate the British citizenship allegations once the FIR is registered by police.

Evidence Presented in Court  

Petitioner Vignesh Shishir told the court that the affidavit and supporting documents could prove vital. He claimed the papers show Rahul Gandhi may have acted as a voter in the United Kingdom and taken part in elections there. The bench will now verify the claims.

Confidential Documents Reviewed  

Justice Subhash Vidyarthi asked the Foreigners Division of the Union Home Ministry to produce all relevant records. Officials submitted the complete set of files, including confidential and top-secret documents, before the High Court in open proceedings.

Lower Court Order Overturned  

The petition challenged the January 28, 2026 order of the Special MP-MLA magistrate. That court had refused to direct the Kotwali police station in Rae Bareli to register an FIR. The High Court set aside the earlier decision and cleared the way for fresh action.

Serious Charges Sought  

The plea seeks action under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 along with the Official Secrets Act 1923, the Passport Act 1967 and the Foreigners Act 1946. The petitioner argued that the issues touch upon national security and citizenship rules.

National Security at Stake  

This is the first time the matter has received detailed hearing at the High Court level. The Union Home Ministry formally placed its stand on record during the proceedings. Officials indicated that the CBI will begin its work immediately after the FIR is lodged.

The ruling has triggered fresh debate on citizenship norms for public representatives. Political observers are watching closely to see how the investigation proceeds. The case is being followed as a key public interest story in the latest news today.

With the Allahabad HC orders FIR against Rahul Gandhi now active, the outcome of the CBI probe will decide the next steps in this high-profile matter that continues to draw national attention.

Supreme Court Restores Attempt to Rape Charge, Overturns Allahabad High Court Order in POCSO Case

In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court restores attempt to rape charge in a controversial case from Uttar Pradesh, overturning a March 2025 order of the Allahabad High Court. The apex court ruled that acts such as groping a minor, breaking her pyjama string, and attempting to drag her to a secluded spot clearly fall within the ambit of attempt to rape.

The verdict, delivered by a bench headed by Chief Justice Suryakant of the Supreme Court of India, comes after the top court took suo motu cognisance of the High Court’s observations, which had sparked widespread criticism across legal and civil society circles.

Background of the Kasganj Minor Assault Case

The case relates to a 2021 incident in Kasganj district of Uttar Pradesh. According to the complaint filed by the victim’s mother in January 2022, three youths allegedly stopped her 14-year-old daughter on the pretext of dropping her home.

The accused reportedly:

 Touched the minor’s private parts

 Attempted to drag her under a culvert

 Broke the string of her pyjama

 Allegedly threatened bystanders with a country-made pistol

A case was registered under relevant sections of the IPC and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). The special POCSO court in Kasganj issued summons in 2023.

Allahabad High Court Verdict Triggered Controversy

On March 17, 2025, the Allahabad High Court held that the alleged acts did not amount to rape or attempt to rape. It dropped IPC Section 376 and Section 18 of the POCSO Act, directing that the accused be tried under lesser charges related to sexual harassment.

The Allahabad High Court verdict drew sharp criticism. Legal experts argued that such reasoning diluted the seriousness of sexual crimes against minors and risked setting a troubling precedent.

Supreme Court’s Strong Observations

The Supreme Court restores attempt to rape charge, stating unequivocally that physical acts demonstrating clear sexual intent and preparation can constitute attempt to rape.

Earlier, while staying the High Court’s order, the bench had observed that certain remarks reflected an “insensitive and inhuman approach.” The court also cautioned judicial authorities against using language that could intimidate victims or discourage them from pursuing justice.

During hearings in December 2025, the apex court emphasized that judicial reasoning must remain sensitive in cases involving minors, especially under the POCSO framework.

Why This Judgment Matters Now

At a time when crimes against women and minors remain a major concern, this ruling reinforces:

 A stricter interpretation of sexual assault laws

 Protection of minors under the POCSO Act

 Judicial accountability in sensitive cases

Legal experts believe the judgment may guide future courts in interpreting what constitutes “attempt” in sexual offence cases. It also signals that higher courts will intervene if lower court rulings appear to undermine victim protection.

Practical Takeaways

For legal practitioners and observers:

 Courts may adopt a broader interpretation of “attempt” in sexual crimes.

 POCSO-related cases will likely see stricter judicial scrutiny.

 Victim-sensitive language in judgments is now under sharper focus.

By overturning the High Court’s order, the Supreme Court restores attempt to rape charge and sends a strong message on safeguarding minors’ rights. The ruling not only corrects a controversial interpretation but also strengthens the legal framework protecting children under Indian law.

As debates around judicial sensitivity and women’s safety continue nationwide, this landmark decision is likely to shape future legal discourse and reinforce public trust in the justice system.